Utter rubbish about Brunty. The runway isn't the greatest but it's suitable for ground running jets. On open days we increase the amount of fire cover we have and the people running the jets are either currently serving members of the raf or are former members. The rest of the volunteers are experienced or supervised etc.

There is, like anywhere, the odd cowboy but for the vast majority of us its done right and proper. Or not at all.

We always, always, check the intakes...

Logged

Hold a chicken in the air stick a deck chair up your nose, buy a jumbo jet and then bury all your clothes..........

You can moan all you like if it makes you feel better, but like all the bitching about ending her flying life it won't make one jot of difference.

They give arguments as to why Doncaster was chosen including "mainly related to the need to have a top-quality runway with emergency support so we can taxi XH558 regularly for her supporters."

XM655 does regular fast taxying at an airfield with minimal facilities and living out of doors. Doncaster has significant disadvantages such as being booted out of house and home when commercial pressures take precedence as we have seen, probably very strict controls and potential penalties for fast taxying - imagine if there were a major problem on the runway and it couldn't immediately be moved. But most importantly with the public road immediately adjacent to the full length of the runway and with far better views than anywhere the public are likely to be allowed inside the airport perimeter, just how many paying customers are they going to get? They may well be regretting that decision, but I doubt they would admit it, and unless a one-off flight can be authorised (even assuming alternative proper accommodation can be arranged) they - and we! - are stuck with it.

They also mention needing somewhere to fly the Canberra from - eventually - but I can't see that needs a full commercial airport either.

I have been following everything to do with Vulcan since the 60's when I used to cycle to Woodford, just to see what was going on.In the final year of flight I saw her 3 times, the final one being the tear jerker at Southport!To press I have not been over to Doncaster and I think I am unlikely to now.

What concerns me about this whole debacle is the desperate need for £200k. Nobody has explained why this is needed. We have been told that it isn't for rent. Also it is not for the new hanger, if it happens. There is no maintainance going on because the staff have all gone, and may not come back.So why?Has anyone looked at the trusts accounts and can comment?

Big mess in my opinion.

And why buy Canberra if there is such a desperate need for funds now. Bit short sighted.

Oh well, rant over. No doubt more will cral out of the woodwork in coming weeks.

Good to hear Roberts detailed explanations and all credit to him having to face unreasonable overbearing questions from Dan O'Hagen. UKAH has always hated the VTTS and the Vulcan --that is clearer to see from the questioning . Robert stood his ground well .

I actually think with all that has been said and not just on UKAR but social media too, the questions asked were fair and by posing those questions Dan O has helped to quell some of the vitriol that has been aimed at the Trust.

RP has always been open and honest and I've known him since 1997. It's a shame IMO that this podcast wasn't done 3 weeks ago.

Was I listening to the same thing? To me his questions were polite, one could almost say respectful. He asked short questions, and listened to long and sometimes a bit rambling responses without interrupting. It would have been a farce of an interview if he didn't ask the questions that were being raised elsewhere.

However. Dr Pleming seems to be attributing 18,000 hanger visitors to Doncaster - I suggest that was down to XH558.

He also mentioned Bawtry Road as a possible site for viewing fast taxying, but that has public access, and used by other organisations for their businesses. One wonders how they could raise income from that. Within the airport boundary viewing options are minimal and restricted.

One of the main reasons for Doncaster was to fly other jet heritage aircraft in and out safely, but elsewhere he says he can see the day when jet heritage aircraft flying no longer occurs in the UK.

And I still don't understand why it was necessary to move from Hanger 3 to Hanger 1. The space is the same, if freight could go into Hanger 3 then surely it could go into Hanger 1. And as the indications are that Hanger 1 was emptied for XH558, which couldn't the bonding be lifted so as to allow public access?

Regarding the double roll. it's the first time I've seen it confirmed that it did actually occur. He mentioned a video, I'd love to see that!

I meant to add, that it is a pity they didn't publish something as clear as this weeks 'Survival Plan Update' newsletter in the first place, instead of vague references to 'secure storage' and no explanation of why the extra money was needed. But even that doesn't make clear the £200k will cover until the new hanger is up and running, Dr Pleming said in the interview there won't be any more requests for emergency funding during that period.

I think in all honesty in this situation you need to think BIG and that is certainly what the ETNA project is.For a charity that has always live hand to mouth and on the edge it is certainly an ambitious project, however many 'not in the know' said that for years about flying 558.

It was certainly down to Dr P that was achieved. Whilst I do not agree with all the decisions made I do trust the fact that they know far more than I do and would never write off Dr Ps tenacity or stubbornness in achieving his aims.